Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
content-engine-mcp

content-engine-mcp

by DevMandalia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

revive_seed

Restores a killed seed by seed ID so the content pipeline can resume drafting, sourcing, or scheduling that idea.

Instructions

Revive a killed seed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "seed_id": "<seed_id>"
    },
    "name": "revive_seed"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seed_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It never states whether reviving requires permissions, whether it restores prior state or starts fresh, or whether it is reversible. For a state-mutating tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words, but at four words it is arguably too terse to front-load any meaningful context. It is efficient but under-specified rather than genuinely structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description must supply all operational context. Four words cannot cover preconditions, side effects, and return behavior for a mutation tool that pairs with kill_seed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one required parameter, seed_id, with 0% description coverage. The description does not confirm that the identifier refers to a killed seed or what identifier format is expected, leaving the single parameter undocumented in both places.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Revive') and resource ('seed'), so the basic action is clear. However, it does not explain what a 'seed' is here or what reviving restores, so the purpose is nameable but not fully understood.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use revive_seed versus kill_seed, get_seed, or list_seeds. The description implies the seed must currently be killed, but that precondition is only inferable from the verb.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools